The Microsoft Corp. argued in court Tuesday that a federal judge failed to take a changing competitive landscape into consideration when he ruled that Microsoft was a monopoly.
In the court filing, the software giant disagreed with many
of the findings of fact reached by U.S. District Court Judge
Thomas Penfield Jackson last year which concluded Microsoft's
dominance in personal computer operating systems had harmed
consumers, competitors and computer makers.
"Even accepting the court's findings of fact, plaintiffs
still have not satisfied their burden under the governing law on
any of their claims," Microsoft argued in its reply to the
government's brief, filed in December.
Microsoft disagreed with the view that it held monopoly
power in the market for Intel-powered personal computers.
Microsoft said that narrow definition excluded "many of the
most serious competitive threats faced by Microsoft's operating
systems."
The company also argued that earlier court rulings made it
clear that it had the right to design its Windows operating
system to include the Internet Explorer Web browser, and that it
never foreclosed the field to competitors.
The government and Microsoft will file one more reply each
before the judge hears oral arguments on conclusions of law on
Feb. 22.
— Reuters contributed to this report.
